On sins... I suppose the closest thing to at least committing the least amount of sins is to fully submit oneself to God's will, because what sin is, in practicality, is doing what is not God's will for us. So I suppose when you get to the point of which you can most approximately be in tune with God's will, so to speak, and stay there, then you're still not perfect, but you're trying as hard as you possibly can.

On sins... I suppose the closest thing to at least committing the least amount of sins is to fully submit oneself to God's will, because what sin is, in practicality, is doing what is not God's will for us. So I suppose when you get to the point of which you can most approximately be in tune with God's will, so to speak, and stay there, then you're still not perfect, but you're trying as hard as you possibly can.

This is the sort of mystic crypticism that evos love.

They are always looking and finding God's will.

Lord have mercy on he who finds God's will and more mercy on those around him if he dare act on it.

Yes. According to corporate cultural lessons through bad sweets we learned today that Diwali means Festival of Lights which means Chanukah which means Christmas in Jewish thus you all are polite, like small talk, smile and important stuff like that.

Yes. According to corporate cultural lessons through bad sweets we learned today that Diwali means Festival of Lights which means Chanukah which means Christmas in Jewish thus you all are polite, like small talk, smile and important stuff like that.

LOL.

I've never had decent Indian food in Ohio (where I think you might be from if I've gathered correctly from other posts) unless it was at someone's house, so I imagine the sweets are also sub-par. But Indians over there, as you say, "are polite, like small talk, smile", etc. Normally, the situation is reversed: the food is great and the people suck.

Yes. According to corporate cultural lessons through bad sweets we learned today that Diwali means Festival of Lights which means Chanukah which means Christmas in Jewish thus you all are polite, like small talk, smile and important stuff like that.

LOL.

I've never had decent Indian food in Ohio (where I think you might be from if I've gathered correctly from other posts) unless it was at someone's house, so I imagine the sweets are also sub-par. But Indians over there, as you say, "are polite, like small talk, smile", etc. Normally, the situation is reversed: the food is great and the people suck.

Actually we have great "Indian" here. Nearly everyone remarks on it who visits. It more towards midwestern sensibilities of course.

Indian desserts are garbage though. I had a lot of Indian guys when I was taking some coursework in engineering who shared their mother's cooking with me. The sweets just never were double chocolate extra cholesterol good.

Indian desserts are garbage though. I had a lot of Indian guys when I was taking some coursework in engineering who shared their mother's cooking with me. The sweets just never were double chocolate extra cholesterol good.

Fair enough: the underlying "philosophy", for lack of a better word, of Indian desserts is different from Western dessert. And a lot of it is just butter packaged inferiorly. That said, I would disagree that Indian dessert is garbage. When it's good, it's great, and when it's bad, it's gross. Western desserts are almost always at least tolerable.

It's not about potency, but ignorance. I think Augustine was right and so was orthonorm, the sin is being born into a fallen world and being ignorant of the entire will of God. We will continue to be "sinners" until we become saints. Well some of you will burn in hell forever, but that is another story.

You can only choose to sin and not sin, but you don't have any ability either way without God either allowing you to sin or enabling you to repent through His Grace. That's why sin is an illness that God must heal and virtue is only possible through Him.

You can only choose to sin and not sin, but you don't have any ability either way without God either allowing you to sin or enabling you to repent through His Grace. That's why sin is an illness that God must heal and virtue is only possible through Him.

You can only choose to sin and not sin, but you don't have any ability either way without God either allowing you to sin or enabling you to repent through His Grace. That's why sin is an illness that God must heal and virtue is only possible through Him.

What is the role of man's innate "infinite potential"?

The infinite potential is in him. It just needs to be activated by God. But until he heals from sin, it is difficult to get to theosis.

What is the difference between sin-less and sin-free? Or is there a difference? A priest told me this is what Mary was. I didn't get it.

Sin-less is completely unable to sin, by nature, like Christ as the Incarnate Word. Sin-free, like the Theotokos, is preserved from sin only because of God's blessing, and so full of grace that they cannot fathom disobeying God's will, through no no power of their own. Since sin is to disobey god's will, and Christ is God, this is not physically possible. While the Theotokos was possible, because of being human and a creature of God, she was so full of grace that she did not. At least, that is the Catholic belief.

What is the difference between sin-less and sin-free? Or is there a difference? A priest told me this is what Mary was. I didn't get it.

Sin-less is completely unable to sin, by nature, like Christ as the Incarnate Word. Sin-free, like the Theotokos, is preserved from sin only because of God's blessing, and so full of grace that they cannot fathom disobeying God's will, through no no power of their own. Since sin is to disobey god's will, and Christ is God, this is not physically possible. While the Theotokos was possible, because of being human and a creature of God, she was so full of grace that she did not. At least, that is the Catholic belief.

She was born like any normal human being. She was sanctified through the indwelling of God, just as the Temple of Judaism was sanctified with the indwelling of God.>>Orthodox view

Logged

I reject all that I wrote that isn't in accordance with the teachings of the Orthodox Church. Also, my posts reflect my opinions (present or former) and nothing else.

What is the difference between sin-less and sin-free? Or is there a difference? A priest told me this is what Mary was. I didn't get it.

Sin-less is completely unable to sin, by nature, like Christ as the Incarnate Word. Sin-free, like the Theotokos, is preserved from sin only because of God's blessing, and so full of grace that they cannot fathom disobeying God's will, through no no power of their own. Since sin is to disobey god's will, and Christ is God, this is not physically possible. While the Theotokos was possible, because of being human and a creature of God, she was so full of grace that she did not. At least, that is the Catholic belief.

She was born like any normal human being. She was sanctified through the indwelling of God, just as the Temple of Judaism was sanctified with the indwelling of God.>>Orthodox view

Hmm... makes sense. But wait, but the Holy Spirit only got to her at the Annunciation, when she was roughly 14- what about all the years before then?

How much does original sin/ancestral curse affect our ability to sin or not to sin? How many of us, if we are honest with ourselves, can go even 1 day without sinning? Is it even possible?

There are specific thoughts that have inspired this question, but I want to keep it general first and see where things go.

It's a matter of will-power and humility.

Most of us know when we sin, however, the sin usually draws us in and we lack the will power or desire not to give in.

We sin daily if not hourly, if not with actual physical sin, but, with thought or desire. We judge people the instant we look at them. We waste time. We tease and hurt others. We get angry and insulted easily.

We sin.

But, as Shanghaiski stated we also have the capability to repent. Problem is, realizing that we are sinning, in order to repent...or better realize the sin, before we commit it.

Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.—St. Isaac of Syria

What is the difference between sin-less and sin-free? Or is there a difference? A priest told me this is what Mary was. I didn't get it.

Sin-less is completely unable to sin, by nature, like Christ as the Incarnate Word. Sin-free, like the Theotokos, is preserved from sin only because of God's blessing, and so full of grace that they cannot fathom disobeying God's will, through no no power of their own. Since sin is to disobey god's will, and Christ is God, this is not physically possible. While the Theotokos was possible, because of being human and a creature of God, she was so full of grace that she did not. At least, that is the Catholic belief.

She was born like any normal human being. She was sanctified through the indwelling of God, just as the Temple of Judaism was sanctified with the indwelling of God.>>Orthodox view

If she was like any normal human being, and most of us pretty much decided it is impossible to go a day without sinning, then wouldn't it be reasonable to think that Mary sinned at some point in her life, even if only once? God saves us through faith in Christ and that is how we are sanctified, but sanctification is a process. No one is made instantly perfect once we begin following Christ, and certainly not before that.

On sainthood- and I think this also relates to the discussion about Mary- Paul often began his letters referring to all who are in Christ as "saints", but we are saints who are still on our journeys while the saints who have passed on have reached their destination. I see no other Biblical differentiation between us and the saints in Heaven.

What is the difference between sin-less and sin-free? Or is there a difference? A priest told me this is what Mary was. I didn't get it.

Sin-less is completely unable to sin, by nature, like Christ as the Incarnate Word. Sin-free, like the Theotokos, is preserved from sin only because of God's blessing, and so full of grace that they cannot fathom disobeying God's will, through no no power of their own. Since sin is to disobey god's will, and Christ is God, this is not physically possible. While the Theotokos was possible, because of being human and a creature of God, she was so full of grace that she did not. At least, that is the Catholic belief.

Are you correcting someone else's errant statements about what you believe, or are you just here to tell us what Catholics believe?

What is the difference between sin-less and sin-free? Or is there a difference? A priest told me this is what Mary was. I didn't get it.

Sin-less is completely unable to sin, by nature, like Christ as the Incarnate Word. Sin-free, like the Theotokos, is preserved from sin only because of God's blessing, and so full of grace that they cannot fathom disobeying God's will, through no no power of their own. Since sin is to disobey god's will, and Christ is God, this is not physically possible. While the Theotokos was possible, because of being human and a creature of God, she was so full of grace that she did not. At least, that is the Catholic belief.

Are you correcting someone else's errant statements about what you believe, or are you just here to tell us what Catholics believe?

Correcting someone's statements about what Catholics believe. I know the drill by now.

What is the difference between sin-less and sin-free? Or is there a difference? A priest told me this is what Mary was. I didn't get it.

Sin-less is completely unable to sin, by nature, like Christ as the Incarnate Word. Sin-free, like the Theotokos, is preserved from sin only because of God's blessing, and so full of grace that they cannot fathom disobeying God's will, through no no power of their own. Since sin is to disobey god's will, and Christ is God, this is not physically possible. While the Theotokos was possible, because of being human and a creature of God, she was so full of grace that she did not. At least, that is the Catholic belief.

Are you correcting someone else's errant statements about what you believe, or are you just here to tell us what Catholics believe?

Correcting someone's statements about what Catholics believe. I know the drill by now.

What is the difference between sin-less and sin-free? Or is there a difference? A priest told me this is what Mary was. I didn't get it.

Sin-less is completely unable to sin, by nature, like Christ as the Incarnate Word. Sin-free, like the Theotokos, is preserved from sin only because of God's blessing, and so full of grace that they cannot fathom disobeying God's will, through no no power of their own. Since sin is to disobey god's will, and Christ is God, this is not physically possible. While the Theotokos was possible, because of being human and a creature of God, she was so full of grace that she did not. At least, that is the Catholic belief.

Are you correcting someone else's errant statements about what you believe, or are you just here to tell us what Catholics believe?

Correcting someone's statements about what Catholics believe. I know the drill by now.

Whose errant statements are you correcting?

The statement that the Theotokos is, according to Catholic belief, either sinless or sin-free. I was making the distinction between the two principles in doctrine, and making sure he knew that was the Catholic and not the Orthodox doctrine as far as I know, so as to not believe my statements to be Orthodox doctrine and somehow accidentally fall into some Latin heresy.

What is the difference between sin-less and sin-free? Or is there a difference? A priest told me this is what Mary was. I didn't get it.

Sin-less is completely unable to sin, by nature, like Christ as the Incarnate Word. Sin-free, like the Theotokos, is preserved from sin only because of God's blessing, and so full of grace that they cannot fathom disobeying God's will, through no no power of their own. Since sin is to disobey god's will, and Christ is God, this is not physically possible. While the Theotokos was possible, because of being human and a creature of God, she was so full of grace that she did not. At least, that is the Catholic belief.

Are you correcting someone else's errant statements about what you believe, or are you just here to tell us what Catholics believe?

Correcting someone's statements about what Catholics believe. I know the drill by now.

Whose errant statements are you correcting?

The statement that the Theotokos is, according to Catholic belief, either sinless or sin-free. I was making the distinction between the two principles in doctrine, and making sure he knew that was the Catholic and not the Orthodox doctrine as far as I know, so as to not believe my statements to be Orthodox doctrine and somehow accidentally fall into some Latin heresy.

So are you saying that the Orthodox priest that said she was sin-free, but not sin-less was not a correct Orthodox position?

What is the difference between sin-less and sin-free? Or is there a difference? A priest told me this is what Mary was. I didn't get it.

Sin-less is completely unable to sin, by nature, like Christ as the Incarnate Word. Sin-free, like the Theotokos, is preserved from sin only because of God's blessing, and so full of grace that they cannot fathom disobeying God's will, through no no power of their own. Since sin is to disobey god's will, and Christ is God, this is not physically possible. While the Theotokos was possible, because of being human and a creature of God, she was so full of grace that she did not. At least, that is the Catholic belief.

Are you correcting someone else's errant statements about what you believe, or are you just here to tell us what Catholics believe?

Correcting someone's statements about what Catholics believe. I know the drill by now.

Whose errant statements are you correcting?

The statement that the Theotokos is, according to Catholic belief, either sinless or sin-free. I was making the distinction between the two principles in doctrine, and making sure he knew that was the Catholic and not the Orthodox doctrine as far as I know, so as to not believe my statements to be Orthodox doctrine and somehow accidentally fall into some Latin heresy.

So are you saying that the Orthodox priest that said she was sin-free, but not sin-less was not a correct Orthodox position?

The infinite potential is in him. It just needs to be activated by God. But until he heals from sin, it is difficult to get to theosis.

Is there some nuance of language I'm missing? "You don't have any ability either way", to me, doesn't mean the same thing as "(infinite potential) is in him...it just needs to be activated by God".

Man is a perfect resonance chamber for the divine. His constitution is a true divine masterpiece. However, if the divine does not flow through man, he just remains an empty resonance chamber (perfect as it may be). So, it is improper to say that it is not man's own capacity to be an infinite image of God, just as it is improper to say that man has the infinite (God) within himself, that he can achieve the likeness of God by himself.

What is the difference between sin-less and sin-free? Or is there a difference? A priest told me this is what Mary was. I didn't get it.

Sin-less is completely unable to sin, by nature, like Christ as the Incarnate Word. Sin-free, like the Theotokos, is preserved from sin only because of God's blessing, and so full of grace that they cannot fathom disobeying God's will, through no no power of their own. Since sin is to disobey god's will, and Christ is God, this is not physically possible. While the Theotokos was possible, because of being human and a creature of God, she was so full of grace that she did not. At least, that is the Catholic belief.

Are you correcting someone else's errant statements about what you believe, or are you just here to tell us what Catholics believe?

Correcting someone's statements about what Catholics believe. I know the drill by now.

Whose errant statements are you correcting?

The statement that the Theotokos is, according to Catholic belief, either sinless or sin-free. I was making the distinction between the two principles in doctrine, and making sure he knew that was the Catholic and not the Orthodox doctrine as far as I know, so as to not believe my statements to be Orthodox doctrine and somehow accidentally fall into some Latin heresy.

So are you saying that the Orthodox priest that said she was sin-free, but not sin-less was not a correct Orthodox position?

I wasn't sure if it was an Orthodox priest who said it, so...

Okay, so, forgive my density here- I just want it to be absolutely clear- you're saying Mary was neither sin-free nor sin-less? She was a sinner in as much need of salvation as the rest of us?